Gas prices...

Tony P. > writes:

> In article >, "Gio" <x> says...
> >
> > > But yes, he is shortsighted. Apparently as long as we can keep
> > > invading countries to assure our oil supply, that's fine with him.
> > >
> > > > "Roger Blake" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > > I drive a vehicle that gets 15 mpg (on a good day), can afford to fuel
> > > > > it even if gas prices go way up, and I make no apologies for it.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Roger Blake
> > > > > (Subtract 10 for email.)
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Stephen H. Westin
> > > Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
> > > represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.
> >
> >
> > Hi Steve thanks for correcting my inaccuracies. I just saw red with Roger
> > and put my fingers into action on the keyboard. We have one of the most
> > expensive fuel costs in Europe £0.75 per litre and this has driven most
> > private car owners to minimising their fuel use. We also get taxed on the
> > amount of CO2 produced by our exhausts and pay a yearly road tax based on
> > the CO2 output. I am not proud of this level of taxation that amounts to
> > approx 80% on the cost of oil but it does make one a little conscious of our
> > planet and its limited resources.
> > I cannot afford to take the attitude afforded by Roger but if I could, I
> > would like to think I could act more responsibly instead of the take, take
> > attitude.
> > By the way, what is the speed limit over there now. We still see the 55
> > sign in your films and hence my mistake.

I don't think there is a national speed limit; it's set by each
state. In New York, where I live, the statewide limit is 55, but with
an exception of 65 on most motorways. I think Michigan is at 70 on
motorways, and I think some Western states may be at 75 or 80. But
then, all these are widely flouted. Practical limits are more like
70-80 around here.

> If we convert litres to gallons, there are 3.7854L to 1 gallon. So at
> .75 pounds per litre, it would be 2.83 pounds per gallon.
>
> Current U.S. to U.K. conversion would mean $5.19 per gallon for us.
> We're approaching $3.00 a gallon now.

Not within a dollar. Around here, it's in the neighborhood of $1.80 a
gallon, and we certainly aren't the cheapest, as we find out on every
trip to Michigan.

> At $5.19 per gallon there'd be
> widespread revolt in the U.S. I guess folks in the U.K. are a little
> more docile when it comes to being taxed out the wazoo, because that's
> most of what you pay for gasoline there.

Well, it wasn't a sudden doubling in price, you know. And I think the
populations of most industrialized countries have a greater
appreciation for what taxes pay for (well-paved roads, medical care,
public safety, etc.) As George Will used to say, "We are, as a nation,
undertaxed."

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.

In article >, rogblake10
@iname10.com says...
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 21:49:47 -0000, Gio <x> wrote:
> >Well that sums up some one with a brain the size of a pea. 15mpg is as dire
>
> If so, yours must be the size of a grain of sand.
>
> I drive what I like, without regard for gas mileage, pollution, or
> what enviro-whiners such as yourself "think." 15 mpg is fine and
> dandy as far as I am concerned.

Ok your highness. Go read this:
<http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20040320_spring20.18ce36.html>

(Roger Blake) writes:

> On 18 Mar 2004 09:40:28 -0500, Stephen H. Westin > wrote:
> >But yes, he is shortsighted. Apparently as long as we can keep
> >invading countries to assure our oil supply, that's fine with him.
>
> Tell us, oh wise one, taking into account ALL of the energy used and
> waste produced in the manufacture of a new vehicle (from mining the raw
> materials to finished product), how long would I have to drive a new 25
> mpg tin can in order to have a net energy savings over driving my old
> 15 mpg model?

Well, I didn't realize that all older cars get 15MPG. Apparently 25MPG
vehicles just went into production this year...

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.

(Roger Blake) writes:

> On 22 Mar 2004 11:54:57 -0500, Stephen H. Westin > wrote:
> >Well, I didn't realize that all older cars get 15MPG. Apparently 25MPG
> >vehicles just went into production this year...
>
> In other words you are evading the question.

No, I'm pointing out that it's specious. The choice is not between
consuming lots of fuel with an old car or buying a new one and
incurring all the environmental costs of manufacture. This is because
there are lots of economical older cars.

Good bye, troller.

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.